AMENPER: The Audacity of LyingWith millions of Americans losing their health-insurance plans under Obamacare, the big question is this: Did the president lie when he repeatedly told Americans, before and after his 2,000-page “signature legislative achievement”” became law, that they could keep the plans they have, like and prefer?.Or maybe there is not a single question, the questions are if the president suffers from a dissociative disorder, a pathological disconnection with reality if he is just a liar or if he is doing this with a hidden political agenda?.I was listening to Jonathan Alter, a liberal columnist that contributes with articles at MSNBC, CNBC and NBC, debating with Sean Hannity. What Alter said gives us is an example of how the liberal press is trying to justify Obama’s lies; it was so strange that it sounded funny, and I copy from the transcript :“Yeah, so I think what is right is that politicians in order to get stuff through, they often make a lot of nice-sounding promises that they then can’t necessarily keep. But, in terms of whether he lied or not, I think it’s very important to know whether he said it before or after the law was passed’ If he said it before the law was passed, then I wouldn’t call it a lie, because, you know, the law went through a number of permutations. If he said it after the law was passed, then he knew that wasn’t going to be true”Cantinflas would be confused by this statement.Mr. Obama made his fabulist promise — you can keep your doctor and insurance, period — before and after the bill passed, which means the next question is whether he even knew what was in his own bill.If we assume that Mr. Obama is the cosmically talented intellect we have been led to believe, then he did, indeed, knew what was in his bill. Otherwise, he didn’t know, which is in keeping with the excuses his aides offer for his debacles and which is in keeping with Ms. Sibelius’ testimony before congress yesterday.Neither possibility is a good one. Whatever the right one is.Yesterday I tried to explain in one of my E Mails, my thoughts about Obamacare false advertising being a case to be open to charges of criminal fraud. A private insurance company’s pulling such a bait and switch, using promises to persuade customers to drop one insurance plan to buy another that failed to deliver on said promises, would be open to charges of criminal fraud.Of course when I said that, I was expressing what it should be, not a real possibility because Obamacare is the law. Thus, although Mr. Obama unequivocally sold his law with the explicit and repeated false advertising that Americans could keep their insurance plans, even as he and those around him knew the opposite was the case, Americans “have no legal recourse.” Mr. Obama sold them a false bill of goods, but they cannot pursue him in court”And he clearly has no intention of rectifying this monstrous injustice.Mr. Alter and the rest of Mr. Obama’s tub drummers can cavil at descriptions of what he did. But “one of those political lies” is still a lie, and this lie, is not, as Mr. Alter would have us believe, something insignificant.Millions of Americans are losing their health insurance because of a leftist politician’s plan for “fundamentally transforming the United States of America.” That is not the transformation most Americans, had in mind.The realities that we are facing with Obamacare are , 1) payments to doctors do not cover costs, and 2) there is already a shortage of some 45,000 physicians, a growing scarcity that will only be accelerated by Obamacare substandard policies. The lie that you can keep your doctor, becomes the reality that you may not be able to keep “any doctor’So let’s go back to semantics, are Obama’s words, lies, madness or evil?Time will give us the answer.

MARLENEILIN: You know the honeymoon is over,when the comedians start.

The liberals are asking us to give Obama time.We agree…and think 25 to life would be appropriate. –Jay Leno

Q: What was the most positive result of the “Cash for Clunkers” program? A: It took 95% of the Obama bumper stickers off the road. –David Letterman

Solution to the problem in Egypt : They want a new Muslim leader. Give them ours!

CAULA: ON JANUARY 1, 2014, THE US GOVERNMENT WILL BEREQUIRING EVERYONE TO HAVE DIRECT DEPOSIT FOR SS CHECKS.WONDER WHY? Subject: HR 4646 Be sure to read entire explanationWatch for this AFTER November elections; remember this BEFORE you VOTE.A 1% tax on all bank transactions is what HR 4646 calls for. Do you receive a paycheck, or a retirement check from Social Security or a pension fund and have it direct deposit?? This bill was put forth by Rep. Chaka Fattah (D-PA).YES, that is 1% tax on all bank transactions – HR 4646, every time it goes in and every time money goes out.Ask your congressperson to vote NO.FORWARD THIS TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW!1% tax on all bank transactions ~ HR 4646 – ANOTHER NEW OBAMA TAX SLIPPED IN WHILE WE WERE ASLEEP!!!!! Checked this on snopes, it’s true! Check it out yourself ~ HR 4646. This is a 1% tax on all transactions at any financial institution – banks, credit unions, savings and loans, etc.. Any deposit you make, or even a transfer within your own bank from one account to another, will have a 1% tax charged.If your paycheck or your Social Security or whatever is direct deposit, it will get a 1% tax charged for the transaction.If your paycheck is $1000, then you will pay the government $10 just for the privilege of depositing your paycheck in your bank. Even if you hand carry your paycheck or any check in to your bank for a deposit, 1% tax will be charged.You receive a $5,000 stock dividend from your broker, the government takes $50 just to allow you to deposit that check in the bank.If you take $1,000 cash to deposit at your bank, 1% tax will be charged. Mind you, this is from the man who promised that, if you make under $250,000 per year, you will not see one penny of new tax. Keep your eyes and ears open, you will be amazed at what you learn about this guy’s under-the-table moves to increase the number of ways you are taxed.Oh, and by the way, if you receive a refund from the IRS next year and you have it direct deposited or you walk in to deposit that check, you guessed it. You will pay a 1% charge of that money just for putting it in your bank.Remember, any money, cash, check or whatever, no matter where it came from, you will pay a 1% fee if you put it in the bank.Some will say, oh well, it’s just 1%. Are you kidding me? It’s a 1% tax increase across the board. Remember, once the tax is there, they can also raise it at will. And if anyone protests, they will just say, “Oh,that’s not really a tax, it’s a user fee”!Think this is no big deal? Go back and look at the transactions you made from last year’s banking statements. Then add the total of all those transactions and deduct 1%. Still think it’s no big deal?The following is copied from Snopes: 1. snopes.com: Debt Free America Act??? Is the U.S.government proposing a 1% tax on debit card usage and/or banking transactions?…It is true. The bill is HR-4646 introduced by US Rep Peter deFazio D-Oregon and US Senator Tom Harkin D-Iowa. Their plan is to sneak it in after the…….moved beyond proposing studies and submitted the Debt Free America Act (H.R. 4646), a bill calling for the implementation of a scheme to pay down the……[2010] by Rep. Chaka Fattah (D-Pa.). His “Debt Free America Act” (H.R. 4646) would impose a 1 percent “transaction tax” on every financial transaction…Wed, 02 Nov 201111:27:37 GMThttp://www.snopes.com/politics/taxes/debtfree.asp

President Barack Obama misled the American people to pass Obamacare and is now in a “bunker” mentality to defend it, talk show host Joe Scarborough said Tuesday on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”“They knew that if they didn’t mislead the American people, they knew if they said there’s going to be winners and losers in Obamacare, it would never pass,” Scarborough said. “He’s in a bunker right now, because he over-promised.”Editor’s Note: ObamaCare Secrets RevealedProblems with Obamacare go beyond its website, but cut to the heart of the healthcare law, Steve Schmidt, Republican strategist and MSNBC political analyst, told the “Morning Joe” panel Tuesday.“One of the things the White House is clearly insinuating is, ‘Look, this is a technical problem. This is a website problem,'” Schmidt said. “This doesn’t go to the heart, the structure of the actual entitlement — the flaws that are inherent to this.”Other concerns about the law will have a “cascading effect” as it “starts to fracture,” Schmidt predicted.“There will be a cascading affect of issues that haven’t really been discussed yet, as this starts to fracture and come apart over the next couple of months,” he said.“The foundation of this legislation, I think, is in the early stages of collapsing,” Schmidt added.Democrats are paying a price for passing the law, Scarborough maintained, and more Republicans will win elections in 2014, as happened in 2010.“They had to lie to pass Obamacare. And now, they’re having to pay for this,” Scarborough said.

“The scar tissue politically will elect a lot more people in 2014 that look like the people that were elected in 2010,” he added.Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/scarborough-obama-bunker-mentality/2013/11/05/id/534879?ns_mail_uid=59556178&ns_mail_job=1544830_11052013&promo_code=157A6-1#ixzz2joHq2KgS Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!

On October 29th, the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing chaired by Sen. Dick Durbin titled, “‘Stand Your Ground Laws’: Civil Rights and Public Safety Implications of the Expanded Use of Deadly Force.”FOLLOW GIRLS JUST WANNA HAVE GUNS ON FACEBOOK!Present were several witnesses who attacked not only SYG laws, but also the Right-to-Carry, and even the American jury system. An overarching theme of the testimony alluded that Americans are too prejudiced to be trusted to exercise their right to self-defense.Thankfully, there were some witnesses who stood on the side of freedom and defended the right to self-defense against the divisive and inaccurate attacks, and made the case that laws protecting this right are sound public policy.The first witness, Rep. Marcia Fudge (D-Ohio), offered a full-throated attack on the right, decrying SYG laws as “unjust and inherently biased.” Fudge also accused law enforcement of racial bias in administering such laws, stating, “[t]he enforcement of stand your ground laws too often rely on the decisions of those with cultural biases on when a person’s life is in danger.”Rep. Luis Guitierrez (D-Ill.) followed Fudge’s lead, claiming that, SYG laws, “exacerbate the mistrust of police of a minority community.” Guitierrez went on to mischaracterize SYG laws as “shoot first” laws and criticized “the gun lobby” for trying to make gun ownership for self-defense “socially and legally acceptable.”During his testimony, Harvard Law Professor Ronald Sullivan incorporated the themes of the previous witnesses and also shared his opinion of the highly publicized case involving George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin.Coming to a different conclusion than that of the jury who acquitted Zimmerman, Sullivan theorized that Zimmerman was motivated by racism and that he shot Martin as Martin was attempting to defend himself from attack. In a radical statement, Sullivan noted that as a result of the Zimmerman case, residents of Florida are led to believe “they can incorrectly profile young black children, kill them, and be protected by stand your ground laws.”One of the witnesses who defended the right to self-defense was Senior Fellow in Constitutional Studies at the Cato institute Illya Shapiro. Shapiro’s testimony made clear that that the concept of no duty to retreat has been part of the American legal tradition dating back 150 years and that it is the law in 31 states. Shapiro went on to note that…Read more at http://girlsjustwannahaveguns.com/2013/11/stand-ground-law-spotlight-sen-dick-durbin-chairs-divisive-hearing-stand-ground/#cT4W022kW8fFCfIY.99

amenper: Politically, where are we right now at this moment? This question is the centerpiece of this article by Peggy Noonan in today’s Journal. Peggy, like she only knows how, gives us a comparative study of different historical programs of the country in recent history. Its passage and the failures at implementation of Obamacare are unique.My conclusion reading this article, and the answer to Peggy’s question is that we are living dysfunctional times under a dysfunctional administration.Obama’s Catastrophic VictoryNov 4, 2013PEGGY NOONANYears ago John McPhee wrote a great book about Bill Bradley called “A Sense of Where You Are.” I keep thinking about that title. You have to know where you are in time and space, you have to know who you are and what you’re doing, you have to be able to locate the moment and reorient yourself within it.Politically where are we right now, at this moment?We have a huge piece of U.S. economic and social change that debuted a month ago as a program. The program dealt with something personal, even intimate: your health, the care of your body, the medicines you choose to take or procedures you get. It was hugely controversial from day one. It took all the political oxygen from the room. It failed to garner even one vote from the opposition when it was passed. It gave rise to a significant opposition movement, the town hall uprisings, which later produced the tea party. It caused unrest. In fact, it seemed not to answer a problem but cause it. I called Obamacare, at the time of its passage, a catastrophic victory—one won at too great cost, with too much political bloodshed, and at the end what would you get? Barren terrain. A thing not worth fighting for.So the program debuts and it’s a resounding, famous, fantastical flop. The first weeks of the news coverage are about how the websites don’t work, can you believe we paid for this, do you believe they had more than three years and produced this public joke of a program, this embarrassment?But now it’s much more serious. No one’s thinking about the websites. They wish you were thinking about the websites! I bet America hopes the websites never work so they never have to enroll.The problem now is not the delivery system of the program, it’s the program itself. Not the computer screen but what’s inside the program. This is something you can’t get the IT guy in to fix.They said if you liked your insurance you could keep your insurance—but that’s not true. It was never true! They said if you liked your doctor you could keep your doctor—but that’s not true. It was never true! They said they would cover everyone who needed it, and instead people who had coverage are losing it—millions of them! They said they would make insurance less expensive—but it’s more expensive! Premium shock, deductible shock. They said don’t worry, your health information will be secure, but instead the whole setup looks like a hacker’s holiday. Bad guys are apparently already going for your private information.Look at the simple, factual eloquence of Edie Littlefield Sundby, from Monday’s Journal. It is a story that tells you everything you need to know about Obamacare. It is the single most persuasive and informative piece written since the whole program began.And now there are reports the insurance companies are taking advantage of the chaos of the program, and its many dislocations, to hike premiums. Meaning the law was written in such a way that insurance companies profit on it.And—I am limiting things to just today’s news – the New York Times reports that while millions may qualify for enough federal subsidies to pay the entire monthly cost of some health-insurance plans, the zero premiums come with some “serious trade-offs.” What serious trade-offs? Most of these plans, called the bronze policies, “require people to pay the most in out-of-pocket costs, for doctor visit and other benefits like hospital stays.” Huh? I thought the purpose of the law was to help with the cost of doctor visits and hospital stays!Back to a sense of where we are. You know where we are? It’s as if it’s 1964 and the administration has just passed landmark civil rights legislation and the bill goes into effect, and everyone looks—only immediately it is apparent that it makes everyone’s life worse! It doesn’t help minority groups – it makes their lives harder and less free! And it does real, present and intimate damage to the majority.It’s as if it’s 1937 and they launched Social Security, only rich coupon-clippers on Park Avenue immediately started getting small monthly checks, and 67-year-old dust bowlers in tarpaper shacks started getting monthly bills.It’s the biggest governmental enterprise that hasn’t worked since the earliest beginnings of the U.S. rocket program, when they kept trying to send rockets into space and they kept falling, defeated and groaning, into the ground. Only the rockets were still unmanned, so those failures never hurt anybody!Obamacare is a practical, policy and political disaster, a parlay of poisonous P’s.And it is unbelievable – simply unbelievable – that the administration is so proud, so childish, so ideological, so ignorant and so uncaring about the bill’s victims that they refuse to stop, delay, go back, redraw and ease the trauma.Two closing notes. In my lifetime the good word liberal was discarded by the Democratic Party. Over the decades they’d run it into the ground and changed it from a plus to a minus. Liberal came to suggest a whole world of bad ideas—soft on crime, eager for gun confiscation, big taxing. So the past 20 years Democrats tried to change their label, and in the Obama era it was finally definitively changed. They were now progressives.Well, the biggest piece of progressive legislation in our lifetimes—not just costly but intrusive, abusive, and marked by a command-and-control mentality—is Obamacare.Remember, “We’re gonna need a bigger boat”? They’re gonna need another name.Second point: I don’t know, maybe the Republican Party could focus on where we are and help those Americans who are beside themselves with anxiety? A friend had a suggestion today. Maybe instead of having oversight hearings on the stupid website, they could be hauling in some insurance executives to see if they’re capitalizing on this bad law and trying to profit on its dislocations? You know, like they’re listening not to K Street lobbyists but the people?Maybe they could even call in some people from the White House and Congress, the ones who helped write and interpret this famous law that you had to pass before you could know what was in it, and ask: “Did you ever meet a normal human? Did you understand what you were doing when you produced this thing?”Maybe they could even ask the president: “In your entire life, from community organizer to lawyer to politician, did you ever buy an insurance policy? Were you always on your wife’s plan, or immediately put on a plush government plan? Did you ever have to do anything like what you’re telling the people of your country to do?”￼￼OriginalOfficials’ incessant talk about living in a 21st-century information society that can generate “big data” to help solve our problems diverts attention from the stubborn truth: Many government agencies and programs operate in an informational stone age.

Medicaid preference could strap states under Obamacare. By Washington Times (DC)

House Republicans suspect the White House has more Obamacare data than it is letting on, sparking a tug of war that is playing out amid fears that Medicaid enrollment could far outpace requests for private insurance under President Obama’s program.House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp, Michigan Republican, sent a stern letter Friday to Marilyn Tavenner, the federal official closest to the health care law’s implementation, threatening to subpoena the records from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.“The committee is not prepared to wait until ‘around mid-November’ for the administration’s scrubbed and spun numbers,” Mr. Camp wrote.The White House has said it will release the figures on a monthly basis, beginning in mid-November, and that it takes time to gather reliable data from the federal exchange system and state-run markets.But Rep. Darrell E. Issa, California Republican and chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, last week released “war room meeting notes” that suggest Obamacare contractors discussed enrollment numbers with officials within CMS on Oct. 1 and 2.The documents said only six people enrolled through HealthCare.gov — the federal website that processes applications from 36 states — on the first day. That number rose to 248 after the second day of activity.The federal website has been plagued by problems that inhibit enrollment — picking a plan and paying for it — so the Obama administration has said only that at least 700,000 people have applied for coverage.“These appear to be notes. They do not include official enrollment statistics,” HHS spokeswoman Joanne Peters said of Mr. Issa’s figures. “We will release enrollment statistics on a monthly basis after coordinating information from different sources such as paper, online and call centers, verifying with insurers, and collecting data from states.”But Republicans are eager to highlight the myriad problems Obamacare is experiencing after their party took a dive in public opinion polls for trying to dismantle the law in the run-up to the government shutdown last month.Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, Washington Republican, told Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius last week that the lion’s share of enrollees on the Washington State exchange were heading into Medicaid, and not private insurance with the help of subsidies, presenting a new avenue of attack after Web glitches spoiled HealthCare.gov’s debut. Mr. Obama already had to backtrack on his pledge that all Americans could keep their existing health care plans.“Not only will this threaten state budgets with new and unexpected costs, but two out of three doctors do not accept new Medicaid patients,” she said in a statement after Mrs. Sebelius’ testimony before the Energy and Commerce Committee.A spokeswoman for Minnesota’s state-run exchange, MNSure said the exchange was processing 3,769 enrollments as of Oct. 16. Of those enrollees, 2,496 were for the state’s Medicaid program, 406 were in the process of paying for private insurance and 867 were waiting for invoices.Sen. Rand Paul, Kentucky Republican, said Sunday that “nearly 90 percent” of enrollees are “signing up for Medicaid, free health insurance from the government.”“My fear is that these hospitals may be bankrupt by overwhelming them with Medicaid patients,” he told ABC’s “This Week.” “Same with doctors. Some may leave the community. Some may discontinue seeing Medicaid patients if they’re overwhelmed. So I see the positive, but I also see the negative.”More than half of the states agreed to expand Medicaid enrollment under Obamacare to those making up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level. That’s because the federal government agreed to pay for 100 percent of the expanded population from 2014 to 2016 before scaling back its contribution to 90 percent by 2020 and beyond.Analysts said the Obamacare publicity would have a “woodwork” effect, and people eligible for Medicaid would take notice of the exchanges and sign up for federal-state entitlements. But only the newly eligible population is covered by the federal government’s new contribution rate, meaning states would feel financial pain if the population that is currently eligible, even without Obamacare, enrolls at a higher-than-expected rate.“The hardest reality about this trend is that the states haven’t budgeted enough for the new enrollees,” said Abigail Moncrieff, an associate professor at the Boston University School of Law.Early Obamacare figures — to the extent they are available — might overstate the problem because people who already are eligible for Medicaid can get it now instead of waiting for Jan. 1, and trends could even out by the time open enrollment ends March 31 and HealthCare.gov improves.Because Medicaid existed long before Obamacare, states were equipped to enroll the woodwork population faster than the expansion population or those seeking private plans on the exchanges, said Jenna Stento, a senior manager at Avalere Health, a Washington-based advisory firm.“You are able to market and reach out to people under an existing program,” she said.

November 4, 2013 You read that right. He also said the United States is an Islamic country.You can see his recent Tweet here.Mohammed Elbiary is an advisor to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) – and on record as an admirer of the late Ayatollah Khomenei.In 2012, U.S. Rep. Louie Gohmert grilled then-DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano about questionable actions and positions held by Elbiary.One of those questionable actions was reported by Patrick Poole in a Pajamas Media story on October 26, 2011:Texas Department of Public Safety officials are asking questions following a report that Department of Homeland Security Advisory Council member Mohamed Elibiary may have been given access to a sensitive database of state and local intelligence reports, and then allegedly shopped some of those materials to a media outlet. He allegedly used the documents to claim the department was promoting “Islamophobia” — claims that the media outlet ultimately rejected. They declined to do the story.

Earlier today, I received confirmation from a left-leaning media outlet that Elibiary had recently approached them asking to do a story attacking Texas DPS.

Napolitano arrogantly dismissed Gohmert’s concerns.There’s an old saying that sometimes truth is stranger than fiction.Mohamed Elbiary serving as an advisor to the Department of Homeland Security proves how accurate that saying can be.

Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., on Monday blasted his old rival, former Gov. Charlie Crist, calling him “a consummate political opportunist that can’t be trusted.”The slap from Rubio — who humiliated Crist in the 2010 GOP Senate primary — came after the ex-governor announced he’d be running for the Democratic nomination to challenge Gov. Rick Scott next year, Sunshine State News reported. Crist joined the Democrats at the end of last year.“Floridians have a clear choice between a governor with a proven record of job creation, and a consummate political opportunist that can’t be trusted,” Rubio said.“Charlie Crist’s governorship was underwhelming, to say the least. Rick Scott has proven himself very capable of cleaning up after Charlie’s mess, creating jobs, and restoring Floridians’ hope about the future.”Some of Florida’s most prominent Democrats stood with Crist for his formal campaign announcement when he suggested his flexibility is a plus for voters sick of partisan warfare in Washington and Tallahassee, The Washington Post reported.“The far-right wing seems to want to make much of my party affiliation,” he told cheering supporters and family members, including his Republican parents. “That is precisely what’s wrong with politics today.”

Estos 4 Son Más DESCARADOS que FIDEL Y RAÚL CASTRO… Usan A USA Como Su Finca Privada…En esta Foto la Pelosi y su esposo y a la SENADORA Dianne Feinstein y su esposo… Ambas son residentes de laSODOMA DE LOS ESTADOS UNIDOS… “San Francisco”… ambas mujeres les han proporcionando MILLONES DE DÓLARES A SUS ESPOSOS EN PRESTAMOS Y NEGOCIOS CON EL GOBIERNO… Pero antes… tratemos de explícanos ESTA SIN RAZÓN…¿Por que la mayoría de los politiqueros… QUE REPRESENTAN “La Libre Empresa” y el Mundo Capitalista NUNCA HAN TENIDO UN NEGOCIO????Siempre antes de ser electos han sido EMPLEADOS PÚBLICOS o de GRANDES COMPAÑÍAS… yCuando Se Retiran… Son Multi-Millonarios… Aquí Les Traigo El ULTIMONegocito Que La Senadora Feimstein le ha CONSEGUIDO a su esposo… Lo NOMBRARON sin tener que presentarse a ninguna LICITACIÓN… AGENTE EXCLUSIVO DE LA VENTAde todas las OFICINAS DE CORREO que van a ser CANCELADAS… con un valor en libros de 19 BILLONES DE DÓLARES la comisión que el va a ganar con agente exclusivo de REAL STATE producirá UNA GANANCIA mínima entre $950 A 1.100,000,000 UN BILLÓN… Ese negocio lo han logrado SIN tener que APORTAR NINGÚN DINERO DE INVERSIÓN… Aquí tienen la Información en Ingles… Dianne Feinstein Cashes In, On Our DimeAfter the recent revelations concerning the parasite/politician class lending their “campaigns”money, then collecting outrageous “interest” payments, this old news is cogent.It is about time to vote them all out, or throw them all out. elected office seems to be a free pass to take all the money you can wheelbarrow out of D.C. and other seats of power. The US has entered into a contract with a real estate firm tosell 56 buildings that currently house U.S. Post Offices. Thegovernment has decided it no longer needs these buildings, most of which are located on prime land in towns and citiesacross the country. The sale of these properties will fetch about $19 billion. A regular real estate commission will be paid to the company that was given the exclusive listing for handling the sales. That company is CRI and it belongs to a man named Richard Blum. Richard Blum is the husband of Senator Dianne Feinstein. (Most voters and many of the government people who approvedthe deal have not made the connection between the two because they have different last names).Senator Feinstein and her husband stand to make a fortune (est at between $950 million and $1.1 billion!!) from these transactions.His company is the sole real estate on the sale. CRI will be making a minimum of 3% and as much as 6% commission on eachand every sale. All of the properties that are being sold are all fully paid for. They were purchased with U.S. taxpayers dollars. The U.S.P.S. isallowed free and clear, tax exempt use. The only cost to keep them open is the cost to actually keep the doors open and the heatand lights on. The United States Postal Service doesn’t even have to pay county property taxes on these subject properties. Would you put your house in foreclosure just because you couldn’t afford to pay the electric bill? Well, the folks in Washington have given the Post Office the OK to do it! Worse yet,most of the net proceeds of the sales will goback to the U.S.P.S, an organization that is so poorly managed that they have lost $117 billion dollars in the past 10 years! No one in the mainstream media is even raising an eyebrow over the conflict of interest and on the possibility of corruption onthe sale of billions of dollars worth of public assets. How does a U.S. Senator from San Francisco manage to get away with organizing and lobbying such a sweet deal? Has our government become so elitist that they have no fearof oversight? And it’s no mere coincidence that these two public service crooks have different last names; a feeble attempt at avoidingtransparency in these type of transactions. Pass this info on before it’s pulled from the internet. Verified on Snopes: http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/blum.asp

Experiencing sticker-shock at the price of insurance on ObamaCare exchanges?That’s more likely if you live in a “red state” that didn’t vote for Obama, according to price data compiled by the Heritage Foundation. In red states, premiums for 27-year-olds rose an average of 78% on ObamaCare exchanges, whereas in “blue states” that voted for Obama, premiums rose a smaller 50%.Senate critics of ObamaCare say the difference is one way in which the bill is unfair.“It’s unfair, outrageous and unacceptable,” Senator John Barrasso, R-Wyo., who is also an orthopedic surgeon, said in a statement to FoxNews.com.“After discovering that the President broke his promise that Americans can definitely keep their coverage, many red state Americans are now finding out that their rates will soar under ObamaCare. This… proves once again that the President’s health care law picks winners and losers across the country,” he added.Continue Reading on www.foxnews.com

Read more at http://cowboybyte.com/25817/obamacare-price-hikes-hit-red-states-hardest/#0pe07Y71rhsgGdfg.99

The White House of Lies November 6, 2013 at 5:00 by Margie Wilson-Mars

Oregon PolitiChick State Director Margie Wilson-Mars is a happily married, mother of 8 children, a shockingly young grandma of 3 and mom to a chocolate lab with OCD. She is a ‘conservative libertarian’… More Share3 Tweet2 0 Share7Recently my local news station was talking about the NSA spying on foreign leaders. The reporter said, “What’s more concerning is thatno one informed President Obama that this was going on.”Did you catch that? The reporter didn’t say, “Supposedly, the president didn’t know…” or “The president claims he didn’t know…” According to this report, there wasn’t a speck of doubt that Obama simply didn’t know! Well…BULL. This was a classic example of the not-so-subtle lies of a very biased media, which is something we, as conservatives, are all too familiar with.Even liberal talk show host and comedian Jon Stewart took a stab at the utter nonsense coming out of the White House. “So for five years, I assume the president is being presented with the findings from this world leader monitoring. And in those five years it never occurred to him to say, ‘How we getting this?’ Does the president believe in surveillance fairies? You know this is crazy.”So who still buys this garbage? Stewart did a similar bit earlier in the year after Obama claimed that he found out about the IRS scandal…on the news! Fast and Furious? On the news!Regarding Obamacare lies, in an article by ‘Sard’ at The Right Planet, there’s a section by Brent Parrish (also from The Right Planet) in which he asks, “How many times can someone bald face lie to you before you’ve just plain had enough? Hmmm? I’m not just talking to Republicans and conservatives here; I’m talking to everyone, regardless of their political leanings.”He goes on to list five Obamacare promises that the president knew were lies:“If you like your current insurance plan, you can keep it. Period.”“If you like your current doctor, you can keep that doctor.”“Your premiums will go down an average of $2500 per year.”“The cost of this national healthcare program will be less than $1 trillion.”“Obamacare would not cover illegal aliens.”It’s well worth a look at the article to see the evidence that proves these ‘promises’ were actually lies. Valerie Jarrett (how does she sleep at night) tweeted this whopper, “FACT: Nothing in #Obamacareforces people out of their health plans. No change is required unless insurance companies change existing plans.” Twitchy replies, “It just makes it illegal for their current health plans to continue to exist! You can’t force someone out of something that doesn’t exist, right?”The lies tumble out of the White House with such ease and I remain baffled as to why anyone still supports Obama. Most of the country doesn’t trust him, the world laughs at him…yet there he sits in the highest office in the land, the White House of lies.What is it going to take? I truly believe if this were a conservative president, he would have been long gone. These “I’m so much better than you” liberals obviously intend to stand behind the Liar-in-Chief Obama and the Wizard Behind the Curtain Jarrett no matter what they do. Rush Limbaugh said of Barack Obama’s lie about “keeping your insurance”, “Richard Nixon resigned over a lie nowhere near this big, and you know the hell of it is that Obama doesn’t think he lied. I don’t think Obama, in his mind, is capable of lying. Whatever is necessary to say or do to advance the agenda is what is morally correct. Doesn’t matter. He doesn’t care. He doesn’t think he lied.”Indeed, and all roads will eventually lead to single payer, by design.Who will suffer most from these cancellations and increased rates? Politico cites a survey from theRobert Wood Johnson Foundation that found people suffering most are primarily people who purchase their own insurance; over 80 percent are white; 60 percent are married and living with their spouse; half are between ages 18-44, and forty-five percent have two kids. They also say that 70 percent of them made over $28,000, and a quarter of them said they require regular medical care. One man in the article says the folks getting raked over the coals the most are “middle to middle/low income”.I agree. Victims of this White House continue to pile up—including the Benghazi four and their families; the people fired from companies facing impossible Obamacare costs; Border Agents not protected by the Feds; the Fort Hood victims, and so many, many more. I’ve had to develop a thick skin because of this president and the fact that many still believe the constant stream of lies coming out of the WH is astounding.

Read the rest of this PolitiChicks.tv article here: http://politichicks.tv/column/white-house-lies/#1RP3ToD1WmCbzfrR.99

Despite Easy Win, Christie Still at War With GOP BaseBy John Gizzi

By winning Tuesday night in a landslide election for his second term as governor of New Jersey, Chris Christie moved so far to the left, it may be difficult for him to win the Republican nomination for president come 2016.The GOP governor won in one of the bluest states — where President Barack Obama beat Republican Mitt Romney by 18 points in 2012. To win, Christie had to morph close to not only blue-state values and views, but become close to Obama himself — and he did just that.Key positions Christie has taken in New Jersey — backing Al Gore’s view that global warming is “for real” and caused by humans; his public slamming of the National Rifle Association and conservatives such as GOP Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky; his acquiescence to gay marriage — all will come back to haunt him in what likely will be a fierce Republican primary fight ahead.Editor’s Note: Govt Prohibited From Helping Seniors (Shocking)Last year Christie infuriated Republicans by embracing candidate Obama when the president arrived in the aftermath of Superstorm Sandy, just days before the presidential election.At that point, polls showed that momentum for Romney stopped and shifted dramatically to Obama.Many in his own party felt Christie was giving a boost to the Democratic president at the expense of Romney. Christie also declined to invite Romney for a visit to the storm scene.“Christie’s strategy of embracing Democrats and criticizing conservative causes and figures has worked in his big re-election tonight, but in terms of his national ambitions, he’s playing a dangerous game,” David Pietrusza, historian and author of three best-selling books on presidential election years, told Newsmax.“He enjoys little margin of error, having endangered his standing with his party’s national right-of-center base,” Pietrusza said.During his governorship and campaign, Christie played the role of happy Republican maverick, earning kudos from shows like MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” while angering some of the key constituencies of the modern Republican Party.Chief among them is the NRA, so influential with swing voters in elections that even Democrats are loath to criticize them.Christie has stridently attacked the Second Amendment group. He called “reprehensible” an ad run by the NRA that pictured Obama’s daughters and pointed out that they attended a school protected by more than a dozen armed guards.“I think we need to have a large, national discussion … and gun control has to be part of it, too,” Christie said in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre in Newtown, Conn., last December.Christie noted that New Jersey has the second toughest gun control statutes in the country — laws the NRA has called “extreme.”Christie has also angered Christian conservatives, a group that by some estimates tallies nearly a third of Republican voters.In August, Christie signed a law that would levy criminal penalties against parents and Christian ministers if they counsel youth to change their sexual orientation or gender identity. One couple recently filed suit against Christie, charging the law infringes on their rights as parents.And while Christie repeatedly proclaimed opposition to same-sex marriage and vetoed a bill to legalize the unions, he surprised many conservatives when the state Supreme Court ruled to legalize gay marriage — and Christie ordered the state’s acting attorney general not to appeal the decision.“It’s definitely not a profile in courage,” Brian Brown, head of the National Organization for Marriage, told Politico. “You’ve got a court in New Jersey that doesn’t understand that it’s supposed to be interpreting the law, not making it up out of thin air.”Christie withdrew his appeal because he doesn’t think there’s a likelihood of succeeding. “There’s no doubt it’s going to affect him” politically in a 2016 Republican primary, Brown said.Ralph Reed, head of the Faith and Freedom Coalition, told Newsmax that Christie “has a case to make to social conservatives.”Reed, a strategist in presidential campaigns and the first executive director of the Christian Coalition, suggested that Christie might emphasize to social conservatives that he is a faithful Roman Catholic and that he oversaw the defunding of Planned Parenthood in his state.“I think in some ways, he’ll face the same challenges that Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani faced,” Gary Bauer, president of American Values and himself a former presidential hopeful, told Newsmax.“He’s a Northeastern Republican and so far no one has proven that such candidates can deliver anything in the Northeast, and they end up having a hard time appealing to the base in the Midwest and the South.”Bauer also voiced concerns about Christie putting the brakes on the appeal of the judicial ruling favoring same-sex marriage because “it fits into a bigger trend that Republicans are being told to follow by the consultants — to just ignore the issue” of same sex marriage.The New Jersey governor also made national news by calling Sen. Paul and other Libertarian Republicans “dangerous” for opposing government surveillance programs.Editor’s Note: Govt Prohibited From Helping Seniors (Shocking)Garden State conservatives almost always give low marks to Christie’s appointees to key positions.His first state attorney general — an appointed position in New Jersey — was Paula Dow, a registered Democrat who took strong stands in favor of abortion and gun confiscation and said “no” to New Jersey joining in the state attorneys general lawsuit against Obamacare.Pietrusza, the historian, offered up a comparison of Christie to a GOP moderate from a previous era.“Christie may be on the path not of the Wendell Willkie of 1940 — who won the nomination as a liberal Republican and fresh face — but of the Willkie of 1944 who had so alienated his party’s base that he crashed and burned instantly,” he said.